Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

blog.boomerangapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#41

Post by JohnFen »

totallychinese wrote: post #38
JohnFen wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best time to schedule a meeting is at 11am Monday morning. I always curse people who schedule meetings first thing in the workday, last thing in the workday, or immediately adjacent to lunch time. If the meeting is an hour long, I'll avoid attending an 11am meeting if I possible can.

Leaving, what, 10am and 2pm?

No, there doesn't have to be a huge buffer. If the meeting is, say, an hour long and the workday is 8-5 with a lunch at noon, then meetings can start 8:30-10:30 and 1:30-3:30.

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#42

Post by fuzzylightbulb »

JohnFen wrote: post #41
totallychinese wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaving, what, 10am and 2pm?

No, there doesn't have to be a huge buffer. If the meeting is, say, an hour long and the workday is 8-5 with a lunch at noon, then meetings can start 8:30-10:30 and 1:30-3:30.

1 hour meetings that start at any time other the top of the hour (x:00) are the absolute worst.

Meetings that are adjacent to lunch are fair game. They just need to start/end on time.

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#43

Post by jltsiren »

deepsun wrote: post #10

It's also culturally dependent -- I noticed US-based employees prefer to schedule a meeting for an idea and discuss/think/make decision on the meeting. EU and even more so Asia-based employees prefer to first discuss the idea on multiple 1:1s for a long time, to discuss / think / make decision with everyone, come up with some harmony before any formal meetings. And the meeting itself would serve only ceremonial needs…

From my Finnish perspective, discussion and decisionmaking are separate activities that need separate meetings. If someone wants to discuss something and then make the decision in the same meeting, I assume that they want to rubber-stamp the decision they have already made. If they come in prepared but the others don't, they have an advantage. If everyone comes in prepared, the actual discussion has likely already happened, and further discussion would be a pointless ritual.

The meetings where decisions are made can be large, because that gives legitimacy to the decisions. Discussions tend to happen in smaller groups, because it's impossible to have an actual discussion with more than about six people. If there are more people, some will dominate the discussion, while others will remain silent.

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#44

Post by watwut »

Solvency wrote: post #23
scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a European-American dual-national this rings so true. I work in a tiny European tech company and it drives me crazy how challenging it can sometimes be to actually get people in the room simply speaking their mind on any subject. It’s a cultural difference that I think really holds back the pace of innovation.

I always hear conflicting stories like this. On one hand, people claim Americans are often too artificially faux positive, too effusive, too . And that you'll have no problem hearing from Scandinavians / Eastern Europeans / exactly how they feel. Often to the surprise of many Americans, who are not used to such candid direct communication. Obviously life isn't so black and white but I am wondering where these general…

This is not about people in Europe not speaking their mind. It is about them not speaking their mind during organized scheduled meeting that has multiple people in it. These people will tell you what they think in one on one or a smaller group. They will tell you what they think spontaneously in discussion. But when you put 8 people of them and formalized it all, they go into formal mode and talk much less.

The two are two different issues, basically. Also, the directness of a discussion kind of depends on a topic. Americans tend to be hierarchical and tend not to want to hear negative things. Eastern Europeans are more likely criticize, express doubts or pessimism. These are seemingly taboos for Americans. But that is kind of orthogonal to the meetings topic.

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#45

Post by watwut »

JohnFen wrote: post #37
kayodelycaon wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“I would recommend/suggest/consider changing this code to this.” Read: Fix your shit. Or give me a good reason to not block your PR until hell freezes over and we all need ice skates. Phrasing things like this works well with junior developers. They feel safer having an opinion or asking questions.

Thank you for this moment of enlightenment. As an American, I totally hear "I would recommend/suggest/consider changing this code to this" as a particular flavor of "fix your shit". That flavor being that the person saying it isn't mad about it, but you really do need to fix your shit. If they're mad, they'll say "fix your shit". My enlightenment was that this meaning is so instinctive to me that I doubt that it woul…

That is the thing. I would take this suggestion as optional. For me, it means that you have some preference, but are not strong about it nor care much. I would not interpret it as "fix your shit".

Polite and direct to me would be something like "I think you should change this code".

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#46

Post by watwut »

908B64B197 wrote: post #15
deepsun wrote: post #10

It's also culturally dependent -- I noticed US-based employees prefer to schedule a meeting for an idea and discuss/think/make decision on the meeting. EU and even more so Asia-based employees prefer to first discuss the idea on multiple 1:1s for a long time, to discuss / think / make decision with everyone, come up with some harmony before any formal meetings. And the meeting itself would serve only ceremonial needs…

> EU and even more so Asia-based employees prefer to first discuss the idea on multiple 1:1s for a long time, to discuss / think / make decision with everyone, come up with some harmony before any formal meetings. And the meeting itself would serve only ceremonial needs -- to let the manager officially declare the idea live. This is so that the manager doesn't lose face in front of his subordinates. In the US, if the…

> This is so that the manager doesn't lose face in front of his subordinates.

Not really, at least in my experience. Arguing against managers in Europe is common, sometimes I feel like more common then Americans expect. Americans tend to expect sort of submission - they interpret disagreement with boss as rudeness. "You can not say no to manager" is something Americans believe in and then they are shocked to come into meeting with Eastern European who just say "no" and acts as if it was normal.

The one on ones are to large extend about forming opinions, testing both ideas and arguments in safe situations, rethinking everything again. You can say something wrong in them and then figure it out next day and change opinion.

Instead of having one high stakes meeting where what you said is set in stone, you have to react instantly in well phrased arguments and don't have that time to think about others arguments.

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#47

Post by shapefrog »

totallychinese wrote: post #38
JohnFen wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best time to schedule a meeting is at 11am Monday morning. I always curse people who schedule meetings first thing in the workday, last thing in the workday, or immediately adjacent to lunch time. If the meeting is an hour long, I'll avoid attending an 11am meeting if I possible can.

Leaving, what, 10am and 2pm?

Nahh, 10am clashes with morning tea and 2pm with afternoon tea.

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#48

Post by Sai_ »

magicalhippo wrote: post #9
fzeindl wrote: post #6

And if you want Meetings to be effective 1. Give out a short bullet point agenda for every meeting and 2. Take a break every 45 minutes.

> Take a break every 45 minutes. Perhaps things are different at the top of the tower, but in my experience if your meetings are regularly longer than an hour I'd say you're doing it wrong, or you're holding a workshop and not a meeting. Get the right people in the room, have a clear agenda and someone to lead the meeting if needed, and it's rare that more than an hour is needed. Often far less. At least in my world.…

Couldn’t agree more.

In my former life as an employee managing teams and projects, I was infamous for having meeting scheduled for 30 minutes which ended in 20 with a plan of action as output.

Long meetings are such a waste.

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#49

Post by fzeindl »

magicalhippo wrote: post #9
fzeindl wrote: post #6

And if you want Meetings to be effective 1. Give out a short bullet point agenda for every meeting and 2. Take a break every 45 minutes.

> Take a break every 45 minutes. Perhaps things are different at the top of the tower, but in my experience if your meetings are regularly longer than an hour I'd say you're doing it wrong, or you're holding a workshop and not a meeting. Get the right people in the room, have a clear agenda and someone to lead the meeting if needed, and it's rare that more than an hour is needed. Often far less. At least in my world.…

> Perhaps things are different at the top of the tower, but in my experience if your meetings are regularly longer than an hour I'd say you're doing it wrong, or you're holding a workshop and not a meeting.

What do you mean by "top of the tower"? If you refer to my position as software architect, that has nothing to do with it.

I worked at many companies and meeting length was ALWAYS a factor of the company culture not of my role.

Personally I schedule meeting that take 45 minutes max. Most of the time i schedule 25 minutes. The 5 minutes are so people have a break in their Outlook calendar.

Re: If you want people to show up, data shows these are the best meeting times

#50

Post by JohnFen »

fuzzylightbulb wrote: post #42
JohnFen wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there doesn't have to be a huge buffer. If the meeting is, say, an hour long and the workday is 8-5 with a lunch at noon, then meetings can start 8:30-10:30 and 1:30-3:30.

1 hour meetings that start at any time other the top of the hour (x:00) are the absolute worst. Meetings that are adjacent to lunch are fair game. They just need to start/end on time.

> Meetings that are adjacent to lunch are fair game. They just need to start/end on time.

Well, it can work, of course. I often have meetings scheduled like that. I hate it, though, because it means that I either have to cut lunch short or skip it altogether. A meeting may start and end at a set time, but I'll still need 10-15 minutes before the meeting to prepare, and sometimes 10-15 minutes after the meeting to perform action items that can't wait (such as updating my task list, my work notes, etc.)

(Lest people think that I value lunch too much, in nearly every place I've worked, taking lunch was required by management. If it weren't, I'd always skip lunch so that I could have an 8 hour long instead workday of 9)

Post reply on HN